The St. Johns herald., 1887-12-15
NUMBER 8

case ot Cottle vs. Spitlzer, 56 Cal, | 459, says: "In the wide range ta-
 ken in the argument of this case,
 much was said in relation to the
 benefcent policy of the law. in en-
 couraging certain branches of in-
 dustry by exemption from taxa
 tion; and that such supposed ex-
 emption ought to be encouraged,
 and passages in the organic law so
 construed as, if possible, to effect
 uate that object. The disposition
 of the question involved does not
 require an examination into the ex-
 pediency or inexpediency of that
 kind of enactment, but it may not
 be out of place to here remark that,
 if the correct principles of free gov
 ernment require that taxation
 should be equal, it is at least pos
 sible that the advantage gained, in
 the direction of fostering partic-
 ular industry, or set of industries, at the expense of others may be
 outweighed by the general injury resulting in the downfall of one of the pillars of the temple of liberty" And finally, coming to the supreme court of this territory, Chief Jus. tice Shields, in Waller vs. Hughes, 11th Pacific Reporter, 122, uses this strong language: "A mere infer, ence that certain property is ex- empt from taxation, will never do; nor will it be assumed, unless the language is too clear to admit of doubt. No property within the ter ritory is exempt from the operation of these revenue laws, unless put beyond them designedly and une- quivocally by the legislature, OF other sovereign power"
 Hence, with the profoundest res- pect for the learning of Chief Jus tlce Wade, we have been unable to escape the conclusion, that so much of the decision. in the Garland case, as declares that section ? of the act of congress, granting the right of way to the Northern Pacific R. R, Co.,, and exempting it from taxa tion in said territories, the road-bed, ties and rails thereto attached, and all the station buildings, work shops, etc., necessary for construct ing and operating said railroad, is erroneous, and at variance with the we'll settled rule of law, that these exemptions should be strictly con- strued. Hence, we are also clearly of the opinion, that section of the act of congress, granting the right of way to the Atlantic & Pacific R. R.. Co. over the public lands through Apache county, and exempting the same from taxation in the territo- ries of the United States, does not
 
 carry it with it and exempt from taxation, in said county, the com- pany's road-bed, ties, rails, etc., nor any of the buildings or other inn provements, attached to and con- upon its said right of way in said county; nor the rolling stock, telegraph, etc., of plaintiff if otherwise taxable. See Detroit Young Mems Society vs. Mayor, etc., of Detroit, Sd Mich., t71; Cottle vs. Spitizer, 65 Cal, 336; People vs. Eddy, 43 Cal, 456; Buff falo City Cemetery vs. City of Buff falo, 46 N. r., sos; Macon vs. Gen. tral R. R. Co.,, 50 Ga., 620; Waller vs. Hughes, supreme court of Ari,. sona, found in Il Pacific Reporter, l22; Welty on assessment, section I69; Conley on taxation, pp. 184, 204 to 207 :; Hoge vs. Railroad Com Dany, 99 U. S., (9th Otto, 348; Vicksburg, Shreveport & Pacific R. R. Co. vs. Dennis, 116 U. S., 665; ,. B. -& K. c. R. R. Co. vs. Guffey, I20 U. S., 569; Northern R. R. Go. IS. Gould, 21 Cal, 259,
 Second, Plaintiff next claims that ts movable. e.personable property; it's .olling stock was exempt in Apache